Stream: Coq devs & plugin devs

Topic: related-tools on Coq website


view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 21 2020 at 21:55):

I took a look at the related tools listing on the Coq website, which is in a pretty sad state:

Maybe rather than updating the page, it should be removed completely?

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 21 2020 at 22:00):

on a related note, based on the sheer number of gforge-hosted content on the related tools page, the shutdown of gforge could conceivably lead to the erasure of a majority of (unmaintained) Coq-related software artifacts from the last 20 years

view this post on Zulip Bas Spitters (Jun 22 2020 at 06:30):

It may be worth contacting the software museum...
I don't have experience with them, but I imagine some of the Parisians here do.

view this post on Zulip Pierre-Marie Pédrot (Jun 22 2020 at 07:24):

@Yves Bertot can probably help as well.

view this post on Zulip Yves Bertot (Jun 22 2020 at 08:04):

There was an uproar at the team management level concerning this move to close gforge.inria.fr. First, we need to be sympathetic to the IT crowd at Inria: most of the forge software are ageing and they represent serious security threats.
But the question of reproducibility in science dictates that we keep access to software sources that have been referenced in published papers, so counter solutions have been proposed.
Among the facilities that are provided by gforge.inria.fr, there are a few features that are less relevant to the Coq community, but may obfuscate the discussion: mailing list management, svn, web-hosting. The first two points are probably irrelevant for the coq-community (since we already migrated most of our stuff outside). But in the general area of web-hosting, it does affect us.

the idea of relying on software heritage has also been mentioned in the discussion.

So I have a few questions: do you think that providing re-direction for all web addresses to data that was initially stored on gforge.inria.fr would be enough to solve all our problems? Would we need to collect all the addresses we wish to preserve? Would it be enough to look at all addresses referred to in the opam-coq-archive?

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Jun 22 2020 at 08:18):

Regarding the "Related Tools" page on the website, yes it is known that it is out of date and multiple attempts at reviving it have been pretty unsuccessful. It has been discussed several times that this page should simply be removed and redirect to the corresponding wiki page (which is easier to edit so might have a chance at being held a bit more up to date).

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Jun 22 2020 at 08:38):

Feel free to open a PR doing that :D

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 22 2020 at 09:13):

ah, we should split the gforge vs. related-tools discussion, sorry for mixing them up. Perhaps the gforge discussion should mainly be on the Discourse or GitHub? I was thinking along the lines of crowdsourcing Coq-related artifacts currently hosted on gforge, will try to answer some issues raised by Yves later today.

view this post on Zulip Bas Spitters (Jun 25 2020 at 16:35):

Speaking about outdated pages, this one could do with some love...
https://github.com/coq/coq/wiki/List%20of%20Coq%20PL%20Projects


Last updated: Oct 21 2021 at 20:02 UTC